D&D General 6E But A + Thread

[Micah Sweet]

I think their ancestry design is far more elegant than D&D.

Probably, because there's nothing elegant about D&D's ancestry design. But I still prefer Level Up's Origin system.

Also, Is it just me or does "elegant" just mean "I like it" to a lot of folks? Seems that way IMO.

 

[Scribe]

Probably, because there's nothing elegant about D&D's ancestry design. But I still prefer Level Up's Origin system.

Also, Is it just me or does "elegant" just mean "I like it" to a lot of folks? Seems that way IMO.

No, it means its clean, simple, easy to understand at a glance.

 

[TwoSix]

Maybe, since XP is a meta element anyway, they could go to a per session reward system. Groups could decide how long in real time they wanted to wait between levels and do it that way. For the much vaunted West Marches style, showing up would maximize level gains. Once would have to decide whether to dock folks for not showing, though. Do you really want to punish Alex because their sitter canceled?

I think that requires making a decision on whether XP is an attribute of the character, or of the player.

We don't treat diegetic rewards like magic items, generally, as something earned by the player; those are attached specifically to a character. No one is giving you the vorpal sword for the adventure you weren't there for.

But, certainly over the last few decades, we tend to treat XP (and levels) as being assigned to the player and the campaign; most people aren't making you start again at level 1 when your 10th level character dies. (I know ENWorld has some loud and proud exceptions here.)

Considering your "adventure path" style play and "West marches" style play are philosophically opposed here in how to treat XP, I am curious if the needle is shifting slightly back towards characters needing to be present to earn their XP.

 

[ECMO3]

Again, can't you just play a game with a more storygaming focus? Must that game be called D&D?

Sure I can, but I would like it if the rules encouraged it more than they do.

I am talking about what I would like to see in 6E.

 

[Micah Sweet]

The thread is a hypothetical 6e. To not consider the largest (most likely) cohort of "D&D" players, would be folly. If you dont think the vast majority would balk at 'Elf' instead of 'Elf Fighter' well...I think they clearly would.

Feel free to consider it. I agree that's valuable. Just remember we cannot assume the feelings of others. It's all speculation and IMO should be presented as such.

 

[Scribe]

Feel free to consider it. I agree that's valuable. Just remember we cannot assume the feelings of others. It's all speculation and IMO should be presented as such.

Of course its all speculation, nobody here has hard numbers, market research, inside information, or poll results.

That said?

There are very obvious, known, nearly carved in stone aspects of 'D&D' and 'Race as Class' would likely be a meaningless statement to the vast majority of modern D&D players, many of which didnt even exist on this planet when that was a current and relevant concept within the D&D ruleset.

 

[Reynard]

I think that requires making a decision on whether XP is an attribute of the character, or of the player.

I think has a lot to do with the fact that for 5E at least as presented in official adventures, there is no real difference between an adventure and a campaign, and the player is not expected to have more than one character during the campaign (PC death notwithstanding).

We don't treat diegetic rewards like magic items, generally, as something earned by the player; those are attached specifically to a character. No one is giving you the vorpal sword for the adventure you weren't there for.

But, certainly over the last few decades, we tend to treat XP (and levels) as being assigned to the player and the campaign; most people aren't making you start again at level 1 when your 10th level character dies. (I know ENWorld has some loud and proud exceptions here.)

Considering your "adventure path" style play and "West marches" style play are philosophically opposed here in how to treat XP, I am curious if the needle is shifting slightly back towards characters needing to be present to earn their XP.

People do seem allergic to characters leveling at different rates -- which is less of an issue in 5E than it was in 3.x, but still more of an issue than in the TSR era.

 

[Argyle King]

Honestly, there’s not many places to go. The OSR/NSR scenes have all the old-school, lethal D&D game space covered. Daggerheart has the D&D but more narrative space covered. Draw Steel has the D&D but crunchier, tactical combat space covered. The only place to go, really, is up.

5E is commonly referred to as a superhero fantasy game. So embrace that. Lean in to the superheroes angle. Just go nuts. Strip out or severely curtail the limitations on PCs and their power. Drop spell slots for something like you’d see in a superhero RPG. Your fire wizard just controls fire now, go. Keep 1st level about where it is in 5E but seriously crank up the power from there.

PCs can already fly at 1st level depending on species. With the right spell or magic item fly regularly by 5th level. So stop goofing around and just go full-on superheroes in a fantasy setting with it. This would also be familiar territory as it would mimic anime power levels.

Fighters more like the Thing punching holes in dungeon walls.

Wizards more like Doctor Strange casting all the spells.

Rogues more like Batman, Daredevil, or Spider-Man.

1-2 level would be familiar territory. 3-5 would be anime territory. 6+ would be superheroes.

So, 4th Edition?

 

[Micah Sweet]

Sure I can, but I would like it if the rules encouraged it more than they do.

I am talking about what I would like to see in 6E.

Ok, but why? Is there not a game that suits your desire for storygaming already? Why is it important to you that D&D's rules encourage it?

I don't mean to badger you, I just don't get the desire for the game you prefer to play to be called D&D.

 

[Lanefan]

I think that requires making a decision on whether XP is an attribute of the character, or of the player.

Indeed. For me they're an attribute of the character all day long.

We don't treat diegetic rewards like magic items, generally, as something earned by the player; those are attached specifically to a character. No one is giving you the vorpal sword for the adventure you weren't there for.

But, certainly over the last few decades, we tend to treat XP (and levels) as being assigned to the player and the campaign; most people aren't making you start again at level 1 when your 10th level character dies. (I know ENWorld has some loud and proud exceptions here.)

Considering your "adventure path" style play and "West marches" style play are philosophically opposed here in how to treat XP, I am curious if the needle is shifting slightly back towards characters needing to be present to earn their XP.

Characters, or players?

Even if the player isn't present at the session the character should still be there in the fiction (unless you're in downtime for that session). And if the character's there in the fiction doing what it would normally do, it gets xp for that.